Antiwar Protest Interview

Olympia, Washington
November 2007
Photo by Kay Schultz

Here I am talking to news reporters about the way police attacked peaceful protesters with chemical weapons, and also the anti-war/anti-imperialism civil resistance movement's need for legal support.

Weyerhauser Log Lifters at the Port of Olympia

Question: does clear cut logging and overseas log export fit in with a future of ecological sustainability and social justice?

More: Weyerhauser Log Lifters at the Port of Olympia

Olympia Yashiro Friendship Bridge

Two Weeks Ago

I already posted this, but want to return to a letter I wrote a couple weeks ago to advocate dropping charges against the Oly 26. This group of people protested against the use of the municipal port for the shipment of military cargoes related to the occupation of Iraq. Drop Charges Against Oly 26 Protesters

LTE re: protest and media

I just sent this off to The Olympian after some considerable wrangling with the word count. I like it. Except for the part in paragraph two, which is kind of confusing. I was trying to pack too many ideas into 250 words.

I intended to communicate that embedded reports have become the norm in the mainstream media. This allows untoward influence over the quality, context and content of journalistic reports.

Separately, though similarly, I intended to draw attention to the fact that the media reprints - as truth - with little to no question about the veracity of the statements, or the integrity of what are virtually anonymous sources, stories that originate from military communications personnel (who have incentive to portray the stories under a favorable, and hence oftentimes false, light.) A good example of this is the media reporting of what happened in and around Fallujah, Iraq soon after the opening days of the invasion/occupation in 2003. Dahr Jamail has compiled good reports about the discrepancy between on the ground reality and reports that the media was being fed by military sources and subsequently presenting as truth in a regurgitated form.

So here's my decidedly imperfect letter:

December 11th, 2007

To the Editor,

Certain prominent officials within the Bush Administration continue to perpetrate and to get away with a wrongful, aggressive and illegal war of occupation in Iraq. There are many factors which enable the Bush Administration's imperial aspirations; not least among them are the politics of fear and division, the leverage of a compliant Congress, and an apathetic Public.

But the Bush Administration may be most enabled in its pursuit of global dominance by a compliant and cooperative mainstream media. For example, embedded military reports are taken at face value with little to no question about the veracity of what are oftentimes virtually anonymous sources. In its compliance with the Bush Administration politics of fear and division, the mainstream media do the USA harm.

Iraq did not pose a threat to the USA prior to invasion.

Our nation's military and military personnel are being misused, and abused, in the service of an unjust and aggressive occupation.

The port blockades were an attempt to stop an unlawful occupation; one that is hurting the people of Iraq and the uniformed service personnel of the USA. To speak against the blockades is comparable to saying that a police officer should not drive in excess of the speed limit in order to apprehend a suspect.

Millions of people in Iraq suffer on a daily basis because of the war. Their suffering goes unreported or glossed over. Where are their voices in our media? Why don't we hear from those who are most impacted by this 'war?'

Thank you and sincerely,

Robert Whitlock

Olympia

[edit added Dec. 12:] Yes - the blockades were an attempt to hold the Bush Administration accountable for the wrongful making of war. They were, for me, an attempt to confine the military vehicles on port property until the commencement of a responsible, safe and complete withdrawal from Iraq.

The blockades were, for me, an attempt to serve the interests of justice by shutting down an intolerable and immoral crusade for control over the petroleum resource of Iraq, a crusade for geopolitical and economic dominance.

I think there is a valid argument to be made that the protests were legal because they were an attempt to hold an Executive Administration that has run riot with the military resources of the USA to account for its wrongdoing. Congress is delinquent. There is abundant evidence to reasonable conclude that prominent members of the Bush Administration have committed heinous and grievous wrongdoings in their respective quests for global dominance and personal power.

Port Militarization Resistance

A military transport ship, the USNS Brittin has pulled alongside the quay of the Port of Olympia, Washington and is unloading its cargo of used military vehicles and containers (cargo mysterious.)

Some of the vehicles being unloaded are "Stryker" vehicles, which were used in Iraq by the 3rd Stryker Brigade from Fort Lewis.

The anti-occupation group, Olympia Port Militarization Resistance (Oly PMR) seeks to contain the return materials on the quay. The materials have been used in an illegal occupation and there is potential for a repeated deployment, which would cause further harm. Oly PMR seeks to contain this shipment for the benefit of the soldiers in the US Military, as well as the people of Iraq.

Please join in Oly PMR's efforts to stop this illegal and unjust military occupation. Oly PMR is committed to nonviolent resistance.

This is a great opportunity to build a movement around the cessation of the imperial occupation of Iraq.

Protect the USA and Iraq from this assault by the Bush Administration!

Port of Olympia Public Testimony

[edit: Let me preface this statement by saying that in no way do I think the employees and commissioners of the Port are intending to do the wrong thing (in regard to military shipments.) I think that the Port's goal of creating prosperity for the county is an honorable one. But there is a point when we, as human beings - and as citizens - have to make decisions about what is right and what is wrong. The unnecessary violence that has occurred, and continues unabated in Iraq, has been promulgated [edit: caused] by US actions. The ongoing presence of US forces is exacerbating, and it prolongs, the problem. (The violence won't stop immediately if the US pulls out rapidly - but it's not stopping now, while the US remains, either.)

It is time to stop this "war." By encouraging (and forcing via nonviolent civil disobedience if necessary) local institutions to comply with moral, humanitarian and legal imperatives, PMR (see below) will take an important step in creating a scenario that will promote the acceleration of an end to the US military presence in - and domination of - Iraq.]

Here is the text of a written comment I submitted a recent Port Commission meeting. I also summarized the comment in verbal testimony during the public comment period of the meeting.

Port Militarization Resistance (PMR) has recently adopted a campaign strategy to oppose the further use of the municipal Port of Olympia to enable the continuance of the illegal and immoral occupation of Iraq. More on that later.

Here's the comment:

Monday, January 22, 2007
Robert Whitlock
Resident of Thurston County

Port of Olympia Commission Meeting Testimony:
The Legality of US Actions in Iraq
vîs a vîs
The Shipment of Military Cargoes Through the Port

In light of the illegality of the ongoing occupation of Iraq by US military forces, I request and urge the Commissioners of the Port of Olympia to adopt an official policy relating to the shipment of military goods through the Port of Olympia. By allowing further military cargoes, the Port is aiding, abetting and enabling the Occupation – thereby subjecting itself to legal vulnerabilities. The Port, in good conscience, must stop allowing cargoes destined to further the occupation of Iraq.

Therefore, I hereby renounce my own support for the allowance of military cargoes destined to support the illegal occupation of Iraq through the Municipal Port of Olympia. Further, as a resident of Thurston County, I request legal and moral asylum from any ongoing participation, by the Port, in the Occupation. I hereby formally revoke assent so as to absolve myself from complicity in the County’s support for the illegal military actions.

But it is not enough to politically revoke my complicity or formally request legal asylum. It is my duty as a citizen to actively oppose the illegal actions of my government. In so doing, I will present evidence to convince the Commission of the basis for my legal understanding of the US presence in Iraq.

Here’s a brief outline of some legal issues relating to the actions of the US in Iraq:

1. Article VI of the Constitution (USA) says:
   “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding.”



2. The Principles of Nuremberg were adopted by the United Nations International Law Commission, in 1950. We have seen the Bush Administration’s prewar intelligence for what it is – a fraud. It is clear that there was no legitimate military motive for launching the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq; therefore the war can only be viewed as a war of choice – a war of aggression. The Principles of Nuremberg are enlightening in regard to the invasion and occupation (and conduct thereof) of Iraq:
   Principle Vl
   The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:
   
   a. Crimes against peace:
   
   i. Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
   ii. Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i). [emphasis added]
   
   b. War crimes:
   
   Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or illtreatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
   
   c. Crimes against humanity:
   
   Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.
   
   Principle VII
   Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principles VI is a crime under international law. [emphasis added]



3. Former Secretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, said the unilateral invasion of Iraq violated internationally recognized legal agreements. Annan said that the USA’s actions in Iraq violated the UN Charter, which requires Security Council approval before the invasion of a sovereign nation.

All of this information is public. I hope this list makes it clear that there is a firm legal basis for my assertion that the war is, indeed, illegal. I request that the Port develop a clear policy relating to any possible future military cargoes destined to Iraq. I ask that the Port deny any further cargoes that are designed to further the occupation of Iraq. Please, do not hesitate to ask me if you have any further questions or to request more information.

Thank you.


[signed]
Robert Whitlock